Quantcast

re-genning existing history

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

re-genning existing history

Ann Campbell
I need advice on the optimal use of sonar.projectDate.

My work group has a Code Quality Goal this year against Weighted Rule Violations. 

And we'd really like to upgrade to 3.1.

But 3.1 includes an upgrade of Findbugs. Now Findbugs is much better at ... finding bugs. Which is truly a great thing!

The difficulty is that the enhanced ability to find bugs (that have been there all along but not detected by previous versions of FindBugs) totally screws up the baseline we're measuring our goal against.

So we're contemplating re-recreating our projects' histories with 3.1

My question is whether I should first delete all the snapshots back to the beginning of the year before I begin the re-creation.

(Hope that makes sense...)


Thx!
Ann

--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: re-genning existing history

David Racodon-2
Hi Ann,

From my point of view, recreating the history for your use case is not the best option.
I'd rather analyze the project with Sonar 3.1 embedding the new FindBugs version. Then, depending on the new measures, I'd reassess your team's goals against the Weighted Rule Violations.
The usual process is when you feel that you are mature enough on your current quality profile, you add new rules. Obviously the Rules compliance drops down, so you reassess your objectives. Your case is similar but the only difference is that this time it is the tool that becomes more mature.

If you really want to recreate your history, to make it simpler, I would recommend you to delete the entire project and then start recreating this year history starting analyzing the oldest versions of your application first.

Regards,

David RACODON | SonarSource
Senior Consultant



On 14 June 2012 22:51, Ann Campbell <[hidden email]> wrote:
I need advice on the optimal use of sonar.projectDate.

My work group has a Code Quality Goal this year against Weighted Rule Violations. 

And we'd really like to upgrade to 3.1.

But 3.1 includes an upgrade of Findbugs. Now Findbugs is much better at ... finding bugs. Which is truly a great thing!

The difficulty is that the enhanced ability to find bugs (that have been there all along but not detected by previous versions of FindBugs) totally screws up the baseline we're measuring our goal against.

So we're contemplating re-recreating our projects' histories with 3.1

My question is whether I should first delete all the snapshots back to the beginning of the year before I begin the re-creation.

(Hope that makes sense...)


Thx!
Ann

--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: re-genning existing history

Ann Campbell
Thanks for the advice David. Of course your preferred method is our first choice. :-)

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:32 AM, David Racodon <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Ann,

From my point of view, recreating the history for your use case is not the best option.
I'd rather analyze the project with Sonar 3.1 embedding the new FindBugs version. Then, depending on the new measures, I'd reassess your team's goals against the Weighted Rule Violations.
The usual process is when you feel that you are mature enough on your current quality profile, you add new rules. Obviously the Rules compliance drops down, so you reassess your objectives. Your case is similar but the only difference is that this time it is the tool that becomes more mature.

If you really want to recreate your history, to make it simpler, I would recommend you to delete the entire project and then start recreating this year history starting analyzing the oldest versions of your application first.

Regards,

David RACODON | SonarSource
Senior Consultant



On 14 June 2012 22:51, Ann Campbell <[hidden email]> wrote:
I need advice on the optimal use of sonar.projectDate.

My work group has a Code Quality Goal this year against Weighted Rule Violations. 

And we'd really like to upgrade to 3.1.

But 3.1 includes an upgrade of Findbugs. Now Findbugs is much better at ... finding bugs. Which is truly a great thing!

The difficulty is that the enhanced ability to find bugs (that have been there all along but not detected by previous versions of FindBugs) totally screws up the baseline we're measuring our goal against.

So we're contemplating re-recreating our projects' histories with 3.1

My question is whether I should first delete all the snapshots back to the beginning of the year before I begin the re-creation.

(Hope that makes sense...)


Thx!
Ann

--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************





--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: re-genning existing history

Ann Campbell
Notwithstanding your excellent advice, David, I'm currently dry-running a recreation of our history. Since deleting the projects in their entirety would be painful for non-technical reasons, I'm trying to start with just cleaning out the last 6 months' history. I was able to delete snapshots back to just before Jan 15th - all but the most recent of course, dated June 22.

I was a little surprised to notice the following in my console for the Jan 15th re-analysis (haven't gone any further yet):
Inline image 1

My 3rd differential period is 2012-01-15 - since that's when we marked the baseline for this year's goal. Did I blow its mind by essentially asking it to compare the analysis to itself? Did it fall back to a default?

The results of this particular differential don't have long-term significance for me (since this is just the first of a series) but I'm trying to understand what happened here... And whether I should change my methodology when I move from dry runs to the "real thing."

Any insight appreciated...


Thx,
Ann



On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Ann Campbell <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks for the advice David. Of course your preferred method is our first choice. :-)


On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:32 AM, David Racodon <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Ann,

From my point of view, recreating the history for your use case is not the best option.
I'd rather analyze the project with Sonar 3.1 embedding the new FindBugs version. Then, depending on the new measures, I'd reassess your team's goals against the Weighted Rule Violations.
The usual process is when you feel that you are mature enough on your current quality profile, you add new rules. Obviously the Rules compliance drops down, so you reassess your objectives. Your case is similar but the only difference is that this time it is the tool that becomes more mature.

If you really want to recreate your history, to make it simpler, I would recommend you to delete the entire project and then start recreating this year history starting analyzing the oldest versions of your application first.

Regards,

David RACODON | SonarSource
Senior Consultant



On 14 June 2012 22:51, Ann Campbell <[hidden email]> wrote:
I need advice on the optimal use of sonar.projectDate.

My work group has a Code Quality Goal this year against Weighted Rule Violations. 

And we'd really like to upgrade to 3.1.

But 3.1 includes an upgrade of Findbugs. Now Findbugs is much better at ... finding bugs. Which is truly a great thing!

The difficulty is that the enhanced ability to find bugs (that have been there all along but not detected by previous versions of FindBugs) totally screws up the baseline we're measuring our goal against.

So we're contemplating re-recreating our projects' histories with 3.1

My question is whether I should first delete all the snapshots back to the beginning of the year before I begin the re-creation.

(Hope that makes sense...)


Thx!
Ann

--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************





--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720




--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: re-genning existing history

David Racodon-2
Hi Ann,

If you set your comparison period to 2012-01-15, Sonar will try to find a snapshot at this date. If it does not find any, it will try to retrieve a snapshot from 2012-01-16. Again if it does not find one, it will try to retrieve one from 2012-01-17 and so on. In your case, Sonar will finally find one at 2012-06-22.

So, first, you should set this comparison date to a date prior to 2012-01-15, a day you still have a snapshot in your database. And once you've analyzed this 2012-01-15 snapshot, set back your comparison date to 2012-01-15.

Have fun recreating your history!

David RACODON | SonarSource
Senior Consultant



On 25 June 2012 20:42, Ann Campbell <[hidden email]> wrote:
Notwithstanding your excellent advice, David, I'm currently dry-running a recreation of our history. Since deleting the projects in their entirety would be painful for non-technical reasons, I'm trying to start with just cleaning out the last 6 months' history. I was able to delete snapshots back to just before Jan 15th - all but the most recent of course, dated June 22.

I was a little surprised to notice the following in my console for the Jan 15th re-analysis (haven't gone any further yet):
Inline image 1

My 3rd differential period is 2012-01-15 - since that's when we marked the baseline for this year's goal. Did I blow its mind by essentially asking it to compare the analysis to itself? Did it fall back to a default?

The results of this particular differential don't have long-term significance for me (since this is just the first of a series) but I'm trying to understand what happened here... And whether I should change my methodology when I move from dry runs to the "real thing."

Any insight appreciated...


Thx,
Ann



On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Ann Campbell <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks for the advice David. Of course your preferred method is our first choice. :-)


On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:32 AM, David Racodon <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Ann,

From my point of view, recreating the history for your use case is not the best option.
I'd rather analyze the project with Sonar 3.1 embedding the new FindBugs version. Then, depending on the new measures, I'd reassess your team's goals against the Weighted Rule Violations.
The usual process is when you feel that you are mature enough on your current quality profile, you add new rules. Obviously the Rules compliance drops down, so you reassess your objectives. Your case is similar but the only difference is that this time it is the tool that becomes more mature.

If you really want to recreate your history, to make it simpler, I would recommend you to delete the entire project and then start recreating this year history starting analyzing the oldest versions of your application first.

Regards,

David RACODON | SonarSource
Senior Consultant



On 14 June 2012 22:51, Ann Campbell <[hidden email]> wrote:
I need advice on the optimal use of sonar.projectDate.

My work group has a Code Quality Goal this year against Weighted Rule Violations. 

And we'd really like to upgrade to 3.1.

But 3.1 includes an upgrade of Findbugs. Now Findbugs is much better at ... finding bugs. Which is truly a great thing!

The difficulty is that the enhanced ability to find bugs (that have been there all along but not detected by previous versions of FindBugs) totally screws up the baseline we're measuring our goal against.

So we're contemplating re-recreating our projects' histories with 3.1

My question is whether I should first delete all the snapshots back to the beginning of the year before I begin the re-creation.

(Hope that makes sense...)


Thx!
Ann

--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************





--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720




--
G. Ann Campbell
Sr. Systems Engineer, IS Production Systems - Shop Floor Systems
Shaw Industries Inc,
201 S. Hamilton St.
Dalton Ga 30720


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************


Loading...